Euthanasia has initiated a debate in many countries on whether ending a patient's life intentionally who suffers from a terminal stage cancer should be lawful or not. This topic has recently gained much attention. This controversial issue was raised because of the few existing countries that have passed legislation. This argumentative essay defends the author's position regarding euthanasia in oncology patients and reviews both opponents and proponents point of views, taking into consideration the legal and ethical perspectives regarding euthanasia. The current authors are against all types of euthanasia, and do not support the legislation of euthanasia in Jordan. The authors, in their defence against legalizing euthanasia, provide four main arguments (religion, slippery slope, reliance, and palliative care) as an opposition stand to persuade readers with their position. A suggestion has been made throughout several recommendations in an effort to resolve the furthermost important ethical and legal debates around euthanasia. The authors conclude that there is no agreement on whether euthanasia should be legislated or not. The opposing side has reasoned that it was contrary to religious jurisprudence and against established basic public taboo. Alternatively, the proponent side reasoned that the patients' autonomy for decision-making had to be respected, which would allow euthanasia to give the patients a means to end suffering and pain.